Carmack Responds To Criticism Of Facebook's Acquisition of Oculus Rift

Sounds like John Carmack wasn't even in the loop when the Facebook / Oculus Rift deal went down. Seriously, considering he is the CTO, how did he not know he was a week away from being a Facebook employee?

I wasn't personally involved in any of the negotiations -- I spent an afternoon talking technology with Mark Zuckerberg, and the next week I find out that he bought Oculus.

Click to expand...

On balance Carmack doesn't seem very enthusiastic about the deal. His defense of the acquisition his half-hearted at best.

He said he wasn't involved in the "negotiations", but he could've agreed to the idea before-hand

Steve said:

Sounds like John Carmack wasn't even in the loop when the Facebook / Oculus Rift deal went down. Seriously, considering he is the CTO, how did he not know he was a week away from being a Facebook employee?

Click to expand...

Your link is broken my friend unless I'm halucinating which is very possible. Your link goes to a blog post by a Peter Berkman. I didn't see anything about Carmack.

Dildonose said:

Your link is broken my friend unless I'm halucinating which is very possible. Your link goes to a blog post by a Peter Berkman. I didn't see anything about Carmack.

Click to expand...

Carmack posts in the Disqus comments at the bottom of the article.

Dildonose said:

post by a Peter Berkman. I didn't see anything about Carmack.

Click to expand...

scroll down to just after the article, you lazy bum

Dildonose said:

Your link is broken my friend unless I'm halucinating which is very possible. Your link goes to a blog post by a Peter Berkman. I didn't see anything about Carmack.

Click to expand...

He posted a response to the article in the comments:

"John Carmack • 2 days ago
I share some of your misgivings about companies "existing and operating only to be acquired". I am a true believer in market economies, and the magic of trade being a positive sum game is most obvious with repeated transactions at a consumer level. Company acquisitions, while still (usually) being a trade between willing parties that in theory leaves both better off, have much more of an element of speculation rather than objective assessment of value, and it definitely feels different.

There is a case to be made for being like Valve, and trying to build a new VR ecosystem like Steam from the ground up. This is probably what most of the passionate fans wanted to see. The difference is that, for years, the industry thought Valve was nuts, and they had the field to themselves. Valve deserves all their success for having the vision and perseverance to see it through to the current state.

VR won't be like that. The experience is too obviously powerful, and it makes converts on contact. The fairly rapid involvement of the Titans is inevitable, and the real questions were how deeply to partner, and with who.

Honestly, I wasn't expecting Facebook (or this soon). I have zero personal background with them, and I could think of other companies that would have more obvious synergies. However, I do have reasons to believe that they get the Big Picture as I see it, and will be a powerful force towards making it happen. You don't make a commitment like they just did on a whim.

I wasn't personally involved in any of the negotiations -- I spent an afternoon talking technology with Mark Zuckerberg, and the next week I find out that he bought Oculus."

Dildonose said:

Your link is broken my friend unless I'm halucinating which is very possible. Your link goes to a blog post by a Peter Berkman. I didn't see anything about Carmack.

Click to expand...

His post was a comment to Peter's blog:

"I share some of your misgivings about companies "existing and operating only to be acquired". I am a true believer in market economies, and the magic of trade being a positive sum game is most obvious with repeated transactions at a consumer level. Company acquisitions, while still (usually) being a trade between willing parties that in theory leaves both better off, have much more of an element of speculation rather than objective assessment of value, and it definitely feels different.

There is a case to be made for being like Valve, and trying to build a new VR ecosystem like Steam from the ground up. This is probably what most of the passionate fans wanted to see. The difference is that, for years, the industry thought Valve was nuts, and they had the field to themselves. Valve deserves all their success for having the vision and perseverance to see it through to the current state.

VR won't be like that. The experience is too obviously powerful, and it makes converts on contact. The fairly rapid involvement of the Titans is inevitable, and the real questions were how deeply to partner, and with who.

Honestly, I wasn't expecting Facebook (or this soon). I have zero personal background with them, and I could think of other companies that would have more obvious synergies. However, I do have reasons to believe that they get the Big Picture as I see it, and will be a powerful force towards making it happen. You don't make a commitment like they just did on a whim.

I wasn't personally involved in any of the negotiations -- I spent an afternoon talking technology with Mark Zuckerberg, and the next week I find out that he bought Oculus." - JC

More "

I did skip the data mining issue, mostly because I just can't get very worked up about it.

I'm not a "privacy is gone, get over it" sort of person, and I fully support people that want remain unobserved, but that means disengaging from many opportunities. The idea that companies are supposed to interact with you and not pay attention has never seemed sane to me.

Being data driven is a GOOD thing for most companies to be. Everyone cheers the novel creative insight and bold leadership that leads to some successes, and tut tuts about companies ending up poorly by blindly following data, but cold analysis of the data is incredibly important, and I tend to think the world will be improved with more and better data analysis.

I have never felt harmed by data mining, and I rather like the recommendations that Amazon gives me on each visit. Educate me. What terrible outcome is expected from this? Be specific." JC

That's a lot of words for "I didn't know, but it'll be sweet! "

I wasn't personally involved in any of the negotiations -- I spent an afternoon talking technology with Mark Zuckerberg, and the next week I find out that he bought Oculus

Click to expand...

--John Carmack

Yes, of course--Carmack and Zuckerberg "spent an afternoon talking technology" a few days before the purchase and not once did the subject of VR and Oculus come up, the company which had employed Carmack, and for which Zuckerberg was primed to spend $2B of his stockholder's money to purchase. For a company with no products and no profits, no less. Never mind that he doesn't explain how he came to be sitting in Zuckerberg's office in the first place...

Sure. I agree that Carmack wasn't involved "in the negotiations" once the decision had been made to purchase the company--that's obvious, as Carmack has no paper skills as a broker. But Carmack pitched VR and by extension Oculus to Zuckerberg--of that there can be little doubt whatever. Carmack has been pitching his own software and companies for decades and he knows exactly how it is done. N00bs like Zuckerberg are sitting ducks--too much money, too little experience.

I'd just like to see a commissions sheet relative to the sale to see what Carmack's chunk amounts to. All this "Golly, gee, I had no idea 'cause I'm just a dumb hick!" from Carmack is insulting.

I honestly have no quarrel with people making money. It's just the way they go about it that sometimes gets me a tad riled.

You assume a bit much there. And to note, it was actually Zuckerberg sitting at Carmack's desk as he was visiting Oculus VR at the time.

_PixelNinja said:

You assume a bit much there. And to note, it was actually Zuckerberg sitting at Carmack's desk as he was visiting Oculus VR at the time.

Click to expand...

Well, thanks, I did not know that. Funny, how the lack of concise information can color a subject. So, who was it who invited Zuckerberg to visit Oculus?

From what I was following on Reddit — initially, Zuckerberg wanted Luckey to go to Facebook HQ and showcase the Rift tech. But Luckey explained the Rift installation they had at Oculus VR would provide a better demonstration; Zuckerberg flew over to them instead.

I also recall someone on Reddit who works in the same building as Oculus VR posting a message mentioning he saw Zuckerberg entering the building, joking about him maybe being interesting in buying Oculus. Who would of knew huh?

While I really don't care about the Oculus deal (wasn't getting one before, still ain't getting one now), reading Carmack's response really made me lose some respect for the guy. Either he is an idiot (which I don't think) or he believes that everyone else is. Zuckerberg doesn't just drop by to "talk tech". Of course Carmack was pitching the Rift (and company) to Zuckerberg. Saying he wasn't involved in the negotiations is just splitting hairs.

ya you hit the nail on the head. Hes just giving a cop-out for any fallout an the payday.

He's actually a pretty smart guy, and his comments show awareness of all the factors involved.

"I am a true believer in market economies, and the magic of trade being a positive sum game is most obvious with repeated transactions at a consumer level. Company acquisitions, while still (usually) being a trade between willing parties that in theory leaves both better off, have much more of an element of speculation rather than objective assessment of value"

Translation: capitalism introduced positive-sum ideas over the previous zero-sum world of mercantilism. This is essentially comes from consumerism which is a natural result of industrialization. The second part of his statement basically admits that Facebook is speculating but the main goal is that both parties get something positive out of it.

"There is a case to be made for being like Valve, and trying to build a new VR ecosystem like Steam from the ground up. This is probably what most of the passionate fans wanted to see. The difference is that, for years, the industry thought Valve was nuts, and they had the field to themselves ...

VR won't be like that. The experience is too obviously powerful, and it makes converts on contact. The fairly rapid involvement of the Titans is inevitable"

Oculus's other option was to be a Valve-like company, which doesn't make sense for the VR field because much larger companies are already making in-roads (Sony, for one). The best way for them to compete and quickly was to get a massively rich benefactor.

"Honestly, I wasn't expecting Facebook (or this soon). I have zero personal background with them, and I could think of other companies that would have more obvious synergies."

He didn't think Facebook was that benefactor...and I don't blame him for thinking that. Facebook is in an acquisitive phase right now and they probably feel they got a good deal on Oculus in return for giving some leeway.

"I'm not a "privacy is gone, get over it" sort of person, and I fully support people that want remain unobserved, but that means disengaging from many opportunities. The idea that companies are supposed to interact with you and not pay attention has never seemed sane to me."

It's called the Information Age for a reason. Those with a business background (in collegiate education) already know that information-sharing is crucial for things like supply chain management. To take it further into the technology age, information and a two-way street with the consumer simply means higher efficiency, which appeals directly to the ideals of capitalism. That's what he is saying here.

"I tend to think the world will be improved with more and better data analysis."

Exactly what he is saying here. Keep in mind I'm not a huge JC fan (actually, I used to mock him back when it was HL2 vs. Doom 3), just saying you need to understand what he's saying before dismissing it.

Youn said:

scroll down to just after the article, you lazy bum

Click to expand...

Yeah thanks for the heads up dude.

Maxx said:

He's actually a pretty smart guy, and his comments show awareness of all the factors involved.

Translation: capitalism introduced positive-sum ideas over the previous zero-sum world of mercantilism. This is essentially comes from consumerism which is a natural result of industrialization. The second part of his statement basically admits that Facebook is speculating but the main goal is that both parties get something positive out of it.

Click to expand...

Yes, Zuckerberg doesn't have to spend his own money and Oculus get $2B in cash and stock... Seems positive from both perspectives. Zuckerberg has already been quoted saying that he doesn't expect the Diving Mask to show a profit. So how does he think it's worth $2B? Is he planning to patent troll, perhaps? (Does Oculus have any patents?)

Oculus's other option was to be a Valve-like company, which doesn't make sense for the VR field because much larger companies are already making in-roads (Sony, for one). The best way for them to compete and quickly was to get a massively rich benefactor.

Click to expand...

Valve-like company? Valve does almost nothing with hardware, except maybe to talk about it a lot... Yea, generally, when you propose to bring a hardware product to market you can count on competition from other hardware companies. It doesn't matter how much money FB can bring to the table--if the product is no good, people won't buy it and it will flop. Since its Kickstarter origins, on to $75M in venture capital, and now another $400M in FB cash, Oculus has done nothing except burn through cash like there's no tomorrow--and still has no product to show for it.

"Honestly, I wasn't expecting Facebook (or this soon). I have zero personal background with them, and I could think of other companies that would have more obvious synergies."

He didn't think Facebook was that benefactor...and I don't blame him for thinking that. Facebook is in an acquisitive phase right now and they probably feel they got a good deal on Oculus in return for giving some leeway.

Click to expand...

Actually, Carmack finds he cannot lie that easily (a good thing) and so he qualifies his statement with "or this soon," to let it be known that he was indeed expecting a sale from his own pitching--just not so quickly. I think he was frankly shocked, and probably feeling a tad guilty, over the fact that Zuckerberg took the bait as quickly as he did. Evidently, Zuckerberg is a pushover for the right buzzword & personality synergies...

It's called the Information Age for a reason. Those with a business background (in collegiate education) already know that information-sharing is crucial for things like supply chain management. To take it further into the technology age, information and a two-way street with the consumer simply means higher efficiency, which appeals directly to the ideals of capitalism. That's what he is saying here.

"I tend to think the world will be improved with more and better data analysis."

Click to expand...

Gosh, and here I thought it was called the Information Age for no reason...

"What he's saying here," in my opinion, is that he personally sees nothing wrong with FB's data strategies. Neither do I, since no one is forced to participate on FB or to divulge any information there whatsoever.

But, what has that got to do with the Diving Mask and Oculus? Not much. At best, it's a purely knee-jerk, defensive statement about FB.

Exactly what he is saying here. Keep in mind I'm not a huge JC fan (actually, I used to mock him back when it was HL2 vs. Doom 3), just saying you need to understand what he's saying before dismissing it.

Click to expand...

What would make you think people don't understand what he's saying?.... They not only understand it, they don't buy it. I think it's likely you who is in the dark--if you are this easily swayed by Carmack's equivocations, rationalizations, and evasions.